The Juvenile Justice System: Corrected Perpetrators

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Status offenses committed
How to process teenage violators
Where the teenagers are uncooperative
How to handle uncooperative parents
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Although status offenses and juvenile delinquency justice are functionally similar, they are fundamentally different concerning the actions that constitute an offense. In this paper, there will be an investigation of the meaning and examples of status offenses. This will be done about the problem question. Furthermore, the paper will seek to answer the question of how perpetrators of status offenses are processed and corrected, underscoring the various rationales that have been provided for such treatment by the juvenile justice system. It will also look at the role of the parent in helping the system to correct such behavior and the stance that is taken by the juvenile system where the parents are uncooperative in that regard.

Status offenses committed

Status offenses are non-criminal acts that are considered offenses by the fact that those who commit them are underage at the time of commission. Therefore, adults can commit the same act without them being regarded as offenses (Kendall, 2007). They are regulated under the premise that they are harmful to minors and that the state should play its protective role towards them by prohibiting such actions. For example, the law regarding underage consumption of alcohol is justified by the fact that most people are not considered to have developed their decision-making skills until the age of 18 years (Rose, n.d). Moreover, some of them develop these skills much later on. The age of 21 years that is set is, therefore, an acceptable compromise for the law in its role of protection. Some other status offenses include truancy, incorrigibility, breaking curfew, etc. (Federle, 2012).

Most cities have laws in place requiring that all children under the age of seventeen years should be home before 11.00 pm failure to which they will have broken curfew and can be detained for having committed a status offense (Arthur & Waugh, 2009). The children who are found committing this crime are often held in a designated center until their parents can pick them up. All four teenagers are therefore violating their curfew and are hence committing a status offense. Possession of alcohol or tobacco is also considered a status offense (Arthur & Waugh, 2009). The current state laws prohibit the purchase and consumption of alcoholic beverages by anyone who is under the age of 21 years (Rose, n.d.). The sole lady is, therefore, committing an offense by possessing a cigarette, and the two male teenagers are also in the commission of a crime because they have a beer.

How to process teenage violators

First of all, I would find out if their reasons for being outside at 1.00 a.m. fall under any of the provided exceptions. The only exceptions that are availed for this offense are when the young violators are either outside after acceptable hours because they are traveling or when they are dealing with a school project (Michon, 2016). None of these teenagers fall under any of the exceptions, and therefore, the only option available is to take disciplinary measures. With regards to curfew violations, I would issue a warning to the teenagers and drop them off at their respective homes. If the teenagers are cooperative and remorseful about their actions, then there would be no need to take them into custody more so if they are first-time offenders.

The reason why I would favor this approach is that how the violators are handled when they first come into contact with the justice system has been considered to be critical for reducing the recidivism rates (Kendall, 2007). For instance, some states usually restrict the involvement of the courts in status offense cases by requiring that the relevant agencies offer the affected families pre-court diversion services (Kendall, 2007). This, it is argued, helps to keep the youth away from the criminal system for as long as possible thereby reducing the risks of recidivism. Likewise, my choice to avoid the involvement of the juvenile penal system is founded on this justification.

Where the teenagers are uncooperative

The process that I would follow is to take the teenagers into limited custodial protection (Kendall, 2007). This means that they will be held in juvenile detention facilities for a maximum of 24 hours. Also, I will contact their parents or guardians as per the requirements of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA). I will also communicate with the agency that is designated to provide services to status offenders to establish initial contact in case they are not readily released (Kendall, 2007).

Even when they are detained, status offenders are still treated differently from juvenile delinquents because status offenses are not crimes (Steinhart, 1996). The state, therefore, assumes a protective role over these violators because they are merely taking correctional as opposed to punitive measures. On the whole, most young people that commit status offenses are kept in private as opposed to public juvenile facilities (Steinhart, 1996).

How to handle uncooperative parents

If a parent refuses to come to the scene to pick his/her child up, this will inevitably affect the way I would handle the case because I cannot leave the teenagers at the scene. The two options I would pursue would be to either deliver the children home or to place them under custodial detention for the rest of the night. Also, I would endeavor to find out whether the parents are aiding and encouraging the teenager in question to break curfew because if so, then he/ she is liable to fines and a period of community service (Michon, 2016). The parents could also be ordered to participate in relevant social services activities so that they can receive learning on more effective ways of parenting and how they can improve their relationships with their children. In such a case, it would also be prudent to place the children with relevant social services authorities who can then decide on how best to assist them.

Conclusion

The paper has, indeed, shown that status offenses are different from other juvenile offenses because they do not constitute the commission of the traditionally recognized crimes. The paper has also shown that the state constructs these crimes and their subsequent punishment around the fact that it must protect minors. Furthermore, the corrective measures that are taken against the offenders are also different from those taken against juvenile delinquents because the state is primarily aiming to prevent these offenses from escalating into criminal offenses which attract much more severe punishment. Furthermore, the state also plays its protective role by ensuring that parents whose behavior contributes to the waywardness of their children are also corrected accordingly. All in all, status offenses are an apt example of how the state aims to maintain social order and to protect the youth from engaging in criminal activities.

References

Arthur, P. J., & Waugh, R. (2009). Status offences and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act: The exception that swallowed the rule. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 7(2), 1-22.

Federle, K. H. (2012). Children and the law: An interdisciplinary approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Kendall, J. R. (2007). Juvenile Status offences: Treatment and early intervention. Web.

Michon, K. (2016). Juvenile law: status offences. Web.

Rose, T. (n.d.). Juvenile and the status offence: A justification for the current system. Web.

Steinhart, D. J. (1996). Status offences. The Juvenile Court, 6(3), 86-99.

Click Here To Order Now!